SOHC (R20A) vs. DOHC (K20Z)
07-09-2012, 06:11 PM
#1
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
SOHC (R20A) vs. DOHC (K20Z)
this might specially interest the canadian customers who had the ability to purchase the prev gen ILX or CSX. The CSX came with a 2L DOHC i-vtec 155hp engine. The ILX is now equipped with a torquey SOHC 150hp engine which however lacks the top end power of the k20z. I think the ILX should have used the DOHC K20Z. Also maybe honda could have just fine tuned it to unleash its potential at 7000rpm like the tsx! here are the comparisons for those interested.
DOHC K20Z from the CSX:
SOHC R20A :
please note that this r20a on the dyno is actually slightly more powerful (asian market) than the one on the ilx and is rated at 156hp vs 150hp.
Comparison Blue is DOHC and RED SOHC:
Bonus, K20Z vs R18A from your regular honda civic 1.8
results:
1. CSX with DOHC 125hp and 116ft-lb to wheels
2. ILX (asian 156ps R20) SOHC ~120hp and 107ft-lb to wheels
3. Civic SOHC ~109hp and 100ft-lb to wheels
canucks keep your csx?
DOHC K20Z from the CSX:
SOHC R20A :
please note that this r20a on the dyno is actually slightly more powerful (asian market) than the one on the ilx and is rated at 156hp vs 150hp.
Comparison Blue is DOHC and RED SOHC:
Bonus, K20Z vs R18A from your regular honda civic 1.8
results:
1. CSX with DOHC 125hp and 116ft-lb to wheels
2. ILX (asian 156ps R20) SOHC ~120hp and 107ft-lb to wheels
3. Civic SOHC ~109hp and 100ft-lb to wheels
canucks keep your csx?
Last edited by pickler; 07-09-2012 at 06:22 PM.
07-10-2012, 10:10 PM
#3
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
amen with the ED.
07-11-2012, 11:09 AM
#4
the last graph confuses me, it says the ilx engine makes 109 hp, but the second graph says 121.
Regardless, if you compare the first and the second graph, looks like the new r20 makes more power in the earlier part of the rev band, thus eliminating the need to rev higher for more power...power also comes on more smoothly and the engine seems less peaky. The area under the curve is what matters in everyday driveability.
Regardless, if you compare the first and the second graph, looks like the new r20 makes more power in the earlier part of the rev band, thus eliminating the need to rev higher for more power...power also comes on more smoothly and the engine seems less peaky. The area under the curve is what matters in everyday driveability.
07-11-2012, 12:39 PM
#5
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
Here are the ratings in Canada
ILX 2.0 AT- 8.6L/100km city; 5.6L/100km highway
CSX 2.0 AT - 9.5L/100km city; 6.5L/100km highway
ILX 2.4 6MT - 9.8L/100km city; 6.5L/100km highway
CSX Type S 6MT - 10.2 L/100 km city; 6.8 L/100 km highway
So indeed, at least on paper, the ILX is significantly more fuel efficient than the CSX. In fact, the ILX 2.4 6MT with 200hp is almost as efficient as the CSX 2.0 AT with 155hp.
the last graph confuses me, it says the ilx engine makes 109 hp, but the second graph says 121.
Regardless, if you compare the first and the second graph, looks like the new r20 makes more power in the earlier part of the rev band, thus eliminating the need to rev higher for more power...power also comes on more smoothly and the engine seems less peaky. The area under the curve is what matters in everyday driveability.
Regardless, if you compare the first and the second graph, looks like the new r20 makes more power in the earlier part of the rev band, thus eliminating the need to rev higher for more power...power also comes on more smoothly and the engine seems less peaky. The area under the curve is what matters in everyday driveability.
07-12-2012, 12:31 AM
#6
2G TLX-S
^^^^^
Nice work, Iforyou.
You previously said that I always came up with lots of numbers and quotations to support my claims, it's really you that does it even better than I do.
Nice work, Iforyou.
You previously said that I always came up with lots of numbers and quotations to support my claims, it's really you that does it even better than I do.
07-12-2012, 11:45 AM
#7
Trending Topics
07-13-2012, 12:27 AM
#8
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
the last graph confuses me, it says the ilx engine makes 109 hp, but the second graph says 121.
Regardless, if you compare the first and the second graph, looks like the new r20 makes more power in the earlier part of the rev band, thus eliminating the need to rev higher for more power...power also comes on more smoothly and the engine seems less peaky. The area under the curve is what matters in everyday driveability.
Regardless, if you compare the first and the second graph, looks like the new r20 makes more power in the earlier part of the rev band, thus eliminating the need to rev higher for more power...power also comes on more smoothly and the engine seems less peaky. The area under the curve is what matters in everyday driveability.
07-13-2012, 01:21 PM
#9
You'll Never Walk Alone
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 9,492
Received 834 Likes
on
518 Posts
Several companies now offer DCT....but so far, no one seems to be able to match VW as it seems like the DSG from VW is the only DCT that has real-world benefits....Hyundai's unit is slower than a conventional AT, Ford's powershift is not smooth, and Chrysler's DDCT acts like a conventional AT.
07-14-2012, 01:51 AM
#10
Three Wheelin'
Thread Starter
Several companies now offer DCT....but so far, no one seems to be able to match VW as it seems like the DSG from VW is the only DCT that has real-world benefits....Hyundai's unit is slower than a conventional AT, Ford's powershift is not smooth, and Chrysler's DDCT acts like a conventional AT.
Last edited by pickler; 07-14-2012 at 01:56 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DiamondJoeQuimby
Car Parts for Sale
1
09-10-2015 11:40 AM
